Quick Links

LimeBike Memorandum of Understanding

MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 16, 2008

The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 16, 2008, at the Village Hall. Richard Fernandez, Chair at 7:00 P.M. with the following persons present, called the meeting to order:

The Planning and Zoning Board of the Village of Miami Shores held its regularly scheduled monthly meeting on Thursday,
May 13, 2004, at the Village Hall. Chairman Richard Fernandez called the meeting to order at 6:45 PM.

ROLL CALL

Richard Fernandez, Chairman

Robert Abramitis

Norman Powell

ALSO PRESENT:

David Dacquisto, Zoning Director

Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney

Valerie Bierley, Clerk

Norman Bruhn

ABSENT:

Sid Reese

Mr. Sarafan swore in all those participating in the meeting.

SCHEDULE ITEMS:

PZ-12-07-200761
MSVC LLC (Owner) (Applicant)
9450 NE 2ND Ave.

Special Approvals, Sec 600: Sec. 504. Signs. Master sign agreement.

Mr. Abramitis moved to table this application. Mr. Powell seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 3-0

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. Although the applicant did not question Mr. Dacquisto the Board did question him concerning the location and available parking space. Mr. Dacquisto stated behind Catholic Charities.

The applicant did not address the Board. The Board discussed the conditions set by staff with the applicant and commented on the appearance of the exterior. Mr. Abramits moved to approve the application with the recommendations set forth by staff and modifying the first recommendation concerning the offsite parking space. Mr. Powell seconded the motion, Mr. Fernandez made a friendly amendment to require a parking sign to which all Board members agreed. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 3-0

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. The applicant had no questions. The Board questioned Mr. Dacquisto concerning the visibility from the street into the ATM lobby.

The applicant did not address the Board. The Board questioned the applicant about the designs of the vestibule and the crime rate since establishing the enclosed area as well as the lighting and video surveillance. After a discussion with concerns to safety issues Mr. Powell moved to table the application. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 3-0.

Mr. Dacquisto provided background information and summarized the information on the Staff Report. The Planning & Zoning staff recommended approval of the proposed site plan with the finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the code subject to compliance with listed conditions. Although the applicant did not question Mr. Dacquisto the Board did question him about the provided drawings and available parking space.

The applicant did not address the Board. The Board asked the applicant if they planed on changing the buildings and where the main entrance would be located. Another expressed concern was the lighting, shutters and the time of closing for each shop. After further discussion, Mr. Powell moved to table the application. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 3-0.

- Mr. Sarafan: That’s true because the contractor’s license is generally required under

the building code. The section on the building code actually says,

under exemptions, that these guys are exempt.

- Chairman Fernandez: The structure itself is actually exempt?

- Mr. Sarafan: Yes.

- Mr. Bruhn: Let me read the section just so you could get started. “The following

buildings and facilities are exempt from the Florida Building Code as

provided by law. Any further exemptions shall be as determined by the

legislature and provided by law. In that event, Chickees are constructed

by the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida or the Seminole Tribe of

Florida.” Then it talks about what the definition of a Chickee Hut is

which is an open-sided hut.

- Chairman Fernandez: Local determination still can preempt?

- Mr. Sarafan: We did it as a legal research early on. We found some attorney general

opinions and basically, they’re exempt from the Building Code. Since

we had an express provision in our code that says, “Chickees not

permitted” it wasn’t a Building Code issue. We do have the authority to

preclude it and we’ve been enforcing that fairly regularly. There’s at

least one that I know of that I believe was constructed before our

prohibition was enacted and he is a lawful non-conforming use. There is

at least one other that’s been constructed since. That’s been cited and

that has provided the impetus for this epic.

- Mr. Dacquisto: Chickees that are constructed by members of the Miccosukee Tribe

of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida as

evidenced by a copy of the builder’s Tribal Members Identification

Card are exempt. What the state statute said is if members of those

tribes build them, they are exempt from the Building Code and no

municipality has the right to regulate them as such. However, what

the state statute specifically said was that these are not exempt from

municipal code regarding zoning. Under zoning, any municipality has

the right to zone out Chickees. Municipalities such as Coral Gables

prohibit location of Chickees within the municipality. Today the

Village of Miami Shores prohibits Chickees within municipal

boundaries. The state statue allows municipalities to prohibit them.

Other municipalities also prohibit them so we are not alone. Part of the issue has to go to what do we always look at around us; this is the harmony clause. There may not be anything wrong with Chickee Huts in certain locations. In the Florida Keys, it’s accepted construction that belongs on the waterfronts. The question is whether or not a Chickee Hut fits into a mediterranean style community does it fit with the ambiance and style of the community. If we are regulating the design of houses to maintain a harmonious blend of buildings within the community and we are emphasizing a Mediterranean- Italianated Spanish style then where does a Chickee fall in with that type of design in our endeavors to maintain the community? The question arises, is this something for the Board to consider? Is a Chickee, and we all know what they look like, harmonious with the intent of the design of the community? Should we choose to allow Chickees, the amendment I recommend would strike out the old language prohibiting Chickees and we would substitute it with the language I have within the report and the change would include:

1. A Chickee shall not be permitted as a principal use on a plot and shall only be permitted as an accessory use to residence; if you have a vacant lot, you can’t just build a Chickee.

2. The Chickee shall be constructed solely by members of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida as evidenced by a copy of the builders Tribal Members Identification Card and shall otherwise satisfy the criteria of section 553.73(9)(i) of the Florida Statues.

3. A building permit issued by Miami Shores Village is required for a Chickee and no building permit shall be issued or construction take place until the status of the builders has been verified and the requirements of Code of Ordinances have been complied with. My understanding in discussing this with the previous Building Official is that as a manner of tracking these, we could issue a building permit. It wouldn’t have to meet the Building Code. The issuance of a building permit would allow us to check for setbacks, which they’re not exempt from, and also to make sure the builders are legally allowed to build it as members of the tribe. Some municipalities do that throughout the issuance of zoning certificates. We don’t do zoning certificates here, so without creating a new process of zoning certificates the best thing to do is just use building permits and we do it as a record keeping not for compliance with the code. The village administrator can always set fees and that would be determined. It would be an administrative fee and review fee rather than a building fee.

4. The Chickee is located in the rear of the residence and shall be situated so that it is located between the prolongations of the sidelines thereof and further provided, that all setbacks for accessory structures are met. Basically this is the same as a lot of the canvas structures in the rear of buildings it has to be behind the house at least so it’s not seen at the sides.

5. A Chickee shall not exceed 300 square feet in area.

6. A Chickee shall not exceed 15 feet in height or the height of the residence measured from the ground next to the residence to the roof peak whichever is less. A Chickee is going to be approximately 15 feet. When you look at the slope of the roof in order to build them, you’re going to come up to about 15 feet. I think there’s no way to avoid that if you’re going to allow Chickees, that’s basically the height you’re struck with. One thing we also want to make sure is this thing doesn’t tower over the house. If your house is a flat roof 10 foot house it’s going to be a problem but I think we want to somehow shelter the neighbors as much as possible from the view because that’s not necessarily the view they intended when they moved to the Shores.

7. A Chickee shall be properly maintained and free of insects, vermin and mold, and shall be rethatched as necessary. Chickees normally last about five to six years before they have to be rebuilt. The most optimistic estimate is ten years but it has to be maintained or it will fall apart.

Recommendation

Planning and Zoning staff recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Miami Shores Code of Ordinances and further that the Planning Board make a motion recommending to the Village Council DENIAL of the amendment toArticle V, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS; DIVISION 7. QUALITY OF BUILDINGS; Sec. 523.1 Construction, Providing for a Chickee as an Accessory Use in the Residential Districts, Providing for Conflicts, Providing for Severability; and, Providing for an Effective Date. However, if the Board finds that the proposed amendment is harmonious with the community and consistent with the intent of the Code of Ordinances the Planning Board may make a motion recommending to the Village Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the Miami Shores Code of Ordinances. If the Board votes to recommend APPROVAL of the amendment, staff recommends that the amendment include the language as I read.

- Mr.Sarafan: A Couple of words about procedure here, as you may know there’s

several ways of proposing amendments of the code. We could propose
them from this body, the council can propose them, there’s a petition
initiative. When the council proposes it, it goes to this body to have public hearings, collect evidence make a report and recommendation. That report and recommendation together with the evidence that you collect and look at, then goes to the council for their action. I just want to make it clear what everybody is doing here. You’re looking at it, your collecting evidence, your hearing public testimony, public comments if any, your making a report which together with all the evidence will go to council and then the council will do whatever in their wisdom they do. That’s what’s here before us.

- Chairman Fernandez: Thank you.

- Mr. Abramitis: Does the Board vote on it?

- Mr.Sarafan: Yes, your going to have to make a recommendation together with

your report.

- Chairman Fernandez: Are there two public hearings?

- Mr. Sarafan: It’s been scheduled for two. It’s not required that there be two, but

there’s two now.

- Chairman Fernandez: We could deal with it in one?

- Mr. Sarafan: You could. He’s scheduled and advertised it I guess. Even if it’s

posted up front that there will be two I’d be a little uncomfortable

in short cutting that at this point. To answer your question, at the

end of the day, the way I see it there’s at least two possible ways

you can go. One possible way is “no we don’t think it’s

appropriate and therefore we voted and passed a resolution that

says we recommend against it and here’s the evidence on which

we based it” and you can explain why or not. The other one is to

say “yeah we like it and here’s the type of ordinance that we

recommend that you, council adopt and here’s the evidence we

based it on” and here’s why. Either one of those will take a vote.

- Chairman Fernandez: Thank you sir. Mr. Dacquisto, last time I think the Board

- Chairman Fernandez: Do you agree with the statement that these structures are

designed to fall apart in big storms?

- Mr. Bruhn: That is correct. The wind blows through the fronds, the fronds fly

away and there is just the structure portion left without the thatching

or with minimum thatching. As Mr. Dacquisto point out the thatching

is only estimated to last five to six years. Again they say with some

of the treatments that you can get ten years out of it but the older the

thatch gets the more brittle it gets and the faster it falls apart during a

storm.

- Chairman Fernandez: So, would you agree with the statement that it is less

sound that the typical concrete structure.

- Mr. Bruhn: Definitely as a domicile. I would not expect during a storm we have

here the main structure of a tiki to fall apart. You would see the

thatch go away, but you would see the main structure remain.

- Chairman Fernandez: Mr. Dacquisto I’ve got a couple short questions for you

sir. You’ve had the opportunity to have worked in the

village and view the various structures, I think you earlier

expressed your opinion as to the general theme being a

Mediterranean style home is that correct?

- Mr. Dacquisto: Yes.

- Chairman Fernandez: Do you have an opinion as to the appropriateness of a

Chickee hut in a Mediterranean style community?

- Mr. Dacquisto: My opinion is it is not suited to a Mediterranean style. If you’re

looking at a Mediterranean style, there’s not a lot of Chickees in

the Mediterranean. I also would go to the example of Coral Gables. Which is a community that this community patterns itself after. Coral Gables finds that Chickees do not fit in with the style of architecture they’re trying to promote. They very strongly promote that mediterranean style in Coral Gables, they have an architectural design board that is much stricter than this board’s view.

- Chairman Fernandez: So, your opinion is that does not fit in?

- Mr. Dacquisto: It does not fit in.

- Chairman Fernandez: Is there any public comment? I do not hear any, public

comment section is closed. Members of the board?

Questions? Comments? I’m going to share with you an

experience with Chickee Huts. When I was going to the

University of Miami, we had a Coral Gables resident who

had a home close to the university, that a lot of us used to

hang out at because he was just a nice guy and football

supporters and all that kind of stuff. The guys from the

various clubs and things would go on over there and the

guy would have basically a tailgate party in his backyard

at every football game. In his backyard along the

waterfront in the Coral Gables waterway was a Chickee

Hut. This was a fairly large Chickee Hut. I would say this

Chickee Hut was probably 10 across by maybe 15 wide.

150 sq ft. or so, 10 ft. up right on the waterline. It served

purpose so he could bring his yacht up along the back

there and he could unload his stuff in the shade, clean his

fish, and do all the various things. The city of Coral

Gables eventually found out about this thing and he had to

take the Chickee hut down. He asked a few of us to help.

We thought this was a fine idea. A bunch of us go over

there to take the Chickee Hut down, I have never seen so

many rats come out of a structure in my entire life.There

were dozens living in the Chickee Hut. I share that,

because there’s waterways here. We’ve got rats along the

waterways, the point being is I don’t know how we’d

avoid it. I go to the issue concerning hurricane stuff.

Which we’re always very careful about the engineering of

things and making sure with the building official. I look at

a neighbor of ours who had an aluminum structure put in

behind her front yard pool and a hurricane came through.

She didn’t get it permitted and what did we have? We had

aluminum structures all over the neighborhood, in the

trees, in the houses, everywhere. I could not imagine with

a 300 sq. ft. and 15 ft. tall. It’s going to be everywhere.

Now to mention my last thing, what do people tend to do

under Chickee Huts.? Bar-B-Q! We had a testimony

concerning potential fire rating a palmetto thatched roof.

In my opinion I don’t think this is appropriate for Miami

Shores.

- Mr. Sarafan: Mr. Chair, if this Board wants it’s recommendation to be followed

by the council, my suggestion is the board identify the evidence supporting that position, to submit together with the report. To that extent I think we should probably follow up with all of the previous suggestions including the fire dept., down the street, including pictures of what Chickee Huts look like after five or six years. Anything that can convince the council that whatever recommendation you’re making is based on solid evidence, will make it harder for them to depart from your recommendation. That’s just my suggestion whichever way you go.

- Chairman Fernandez: I concur with that. That was the attempt this Board made

earlier to get somebody to come and testify. We have

testimony from two officials here of the Village but I do

believe it would be a good idea to have some backup. I

also think it would be beneficial on the political side of

this to do the same thing. Mr. Dacquisto can you do that?

- Mr. Dacquisto: We will try to round up more evidence.

- Chairman Fernandez: OK and then we could deal with it at the second hearing.

Is that what we do?

- Mr. Sarafan: I think that a great idea.

- Chairman Fernandez: I was the only one talking. I hope there’s other support so

that people get on the record with us.

Mr. Abramitis: I don’t think we need Chickees in the village. To me it’s straightforward, I’ve seen Chickee Huts at different times,

I’ve seen the rodents in them; Frankly, I wouldn’t want those next

to me as a breeding ground. That’s my thoughts. There unsightly,

they breed vermin, their not gonna look good, how are we gonna

maintain them if there’s hundreds of them in the Village over

time at different stages of repair or disrepair. I just don’t see how

it’s really gonna workout.

- Mr. Sarafan: You might want to reach out to the agriculture extension office.

They may have some information on that.

- Chairman Fernandez: The politic of that would indicate to me that the state

exempting the Chickee Huts would not necessarily see the

agriculture people getting up in their face.

- Mr. Sarafan: The agriculture people are not subject to the same set of pressures

that the legislature is. It may or may not be helpful I don’t know.

It’s a thought.

- Chairman Fernandez: OK Mr. Powell do you wish to be on record?

- Mr. Powell: I just don’t think it belongs here. I’ve seen a couple of them in the

same experiences you guys are talking about.

- Chairman Fernandez: Alright, at this point in time the appropriate item is to

table to the second hearing, is there a motion?

Mr. Powell moved to table this item. Mr. Abramitis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion 3-0.

NEXT MEETING

The next regular meeting will be on November 13, 2008

ADJOURNMENT

The October 16, 2008 Planning & Zoning meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.

The Côte Gourmet restaurant was approved in the 9999 building at a public hearing held on March 22, 2007. Côte Gourmet replaced an existing restaurant.

The applicant is proposing to expand the existing restaurant by adding 200 square feet to the existing dining area.

The expansion requires one (1) new parking space. The applicant requires two (2) parking spaces for the additional 200 square foot dining area. The applicant is given credit for one (1) parking space for the existing use. The applicant must therefore provide one (1) new parking space and is proposing to enter into a lease agreement with 9900 NE 2nd Avenue for one (1) off-site parking space. The lease agreement will require approval by the village council.

Analysis

The expansion will require DERM and Department of Health approval.

Any approval is contingent upon the applicant providing one (1) new parking space.

The proposed off-site parking facility is located within 100 yards of the main parcel for which permission for off-site parking is being sought in conformance with village code requirements.

The proposal is consistent with the technical provisions of the Village Code except as noted.

Recommendation

Planning and Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of the site plan with a finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the Code. However, the Planning Board must make a finding that the proposed improvements are harmonious with the community, as required in Section 523 of the Code and, in that regard, may add further conditions or delete or modify staff recommended conditions, deny the application, or continue the item for future consideration. Should the board find that the applicant merits approval, staff recommends that the following conditions apply:

1) Applicant to secure a lease for one (1) off-site parking space and to secure village council approval for the lease prior to the issuance of village building permits.

2) Applicant to secure any additional development approvals required by DERM and Department of Health, prior to the issuance of village building permits.

3) Applicant to obtain all required building permits before beginning work.

4) Applicant to meet all applicable code provisions at the time of permitting.

5) Applicant to utilize only roofing material that is approved by the building official.

6) This zoning permit will lapse and become invalid unless the work for which it was approved is started within one (1) year of the signing of the development order by the board chair, or if the work authorized by it is suspended or abandoned for a period of at least one (1) year.

The applicant proposes to enclose an existing open entryway at the south end of the building and to place an ATM within the new lobby. The new lobby will be accessible by using an ATM card, outside normal business hours. The lobby will open to the south parking lot. The lobby entrance and lobby will be visible from NE 94th Street with partial visibility from NE 2nd Avenue.

The lobby will have two ATMs.

Each ATM faces a wall and will have a camera recording the activity in front. There is a third camera in the ceiling that will cover the activity in the lobby and towards the door. There is no outdoor camera to record the activity in front and around the door.

Analysis

The Miami Shores Police Department was provided a copy of the site plan for review and did not comment.

An additional camera to record activity around the door and parking lot may help to deter criminal activity outside the lobby.

The proposal is consistent with the technical provisions of the Village Code.

Recommendation

Planning and Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of the site plan with a finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the Code. However, the Planning Board must make a finding that the proposed improvements are harmonious with the community, as required in Section 523 of the Code and, in that regard, may add further conditions or delete or modify staff recommended conditions, deny the application, or continue the item for future consideration. Should the board find that the applicant merits approval, staff recommends that the following conditions apply:

1) Applicant to obtain all required building permits before beginning work.

2) Applicant to comply with all applicable code provisions at the time of permitting.

3) Applicant to install a surveillance camera or cameras to record activity outside the lobby.

4) This zoning permit will lapse and become invalid unless the work for which it was approved is started within one (1) year of the signing of the development order by the board chair, or if the work authorized by it is suspended or abandoned for a period of at least one (1) year.

The site appears to consist of 5 separate buildings with common walls developed now with a common front façade that unifies the buildings. The development includes all buildings on the block between NE 97th Street and NE 96th Street, on the west side of NE 2nd Avenue.

The property has two Folio numbers with the northerly 2 buildings in the 2500 folio and the southerly 3 buildings in the 2510 folio.

The applicant proposes to remodel the development.

The most notable features of the proposed development are the new passageway between buildings and the return to individuality of all storefronts.

The applicant proposes to create a covered walkway through the building to create a pedestrian link between NE 2nd Avenue and the alley and parking to the rear. The passageway would also provide access to some of the businesses within the building.

The overall façade will be altered to bring back individual differentiated store fronts breaking up the current uniformity of the block.

The large interior spaces will be divided to create smaller rental units which may include individual bathrooms.

Analysis

The proposed design improves the look of the development and will enhance the appearance of the downtown.

The development is subject to DERM and Department of Health review and a determination will be made by them as to the adequacy of the current septic system and the necessity if any to upgrade or replace the system.

The proposal is consistent with the technical provisions of the Village Code.

Recommendation

Planning and Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of the site plan with a finding that it is consistent with the technical provisions of the Code. However, the Planning Board must make a finding that the proposed improvements are harmonious with the community, as required in Section 523 of the Code and, in that regard, may add further conditions or delete or modify staff recommended conditions, deny the application, or continue the item for future consideration. Should the board find that the applicant merits approval, staff recommends that the following conditions apply:

1) Applicant to secure any additional development approvals required by DERM and Department of Health, prior to the issuance of village building permits.

2) Applicant to obtain all required building permits before beginning work.

3) Applicant to meet all applicable code provisions at the time of permitting.

4) Applicant to utilize only roofing material that is approved by the building official.

5) This zoning permit will lapse and become invalid unless the work for which it was approved is started within one (1) year of the signing of the development order by the board chair, or if the work authorized by it is suspended or abandoned for a period of at least one (1) year.

Amendment to Section 523.1 of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances to Permit Chickees in the Village

Action Required

Recommend that the Village Council Approve the Amendment, Recommend that the Village Council Approve the Amendment as Modified, Recommend Denial, Forward to the Village Council Without Recommendation

Staff Report

David A. Dacquisto AICP, Director, Planning and Zoning

Report Date

October 27, 2008

Background

At a public hearing on September 2, 2008, the village council passed a resolution to consider amendment of Section 523.1 of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances to Permit Chickees in the Village:

The Miami Shores Village Council hereby proposes to amend Section 523.1 of the Zoning Code in order to permit the erection of no more than one Chickee per each plot in the residentially zoned portions of Miami Shores Village, provided that the size of each shall not exceed ___________ square feet, that the location thereof be limited to rear yards only and must comply with all set-back requirements in the Zoning Code, that each such Chickee shall require site plan approval by the Village Planning Board in accordance with the standards set forth in Article 6 of the Zoning Code, and subject to the further restriction that such Chickees shall be constructed solely by members of the Miccosukee tribe of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida and shall otherwise satisfy the criteria of Section 553.73(9)(i) of the Florida Statutes.

According to the Miami Shores Code of Ordinances, code amendments initiated by the Village Council are referred to the Planning Board for consideration and recommendation. The Board will conduct a first reading of the proposed amendment at a public hearing October 16, 2008. The Board will then hold a second reading of the proposed amendment at a public hearing tentatively scheduled for November 13, 2008 where the public will have an opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment, a staff report will be presented including alternative language, and after consideration of the information provided, the Planning Board will make a recommendation on the amendment to be forwarded to the Village Council.

Analysis

State Statute exempts a chickee constructed by members of the Miccosukee tribe of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, as evidenced by a copy of the builders Tribal Members Identification Card and otherwise satisfying the criteria of Section 553.73(8)(i) of the Florida Statutes, from the building code. State Statute does not exempt the chickee from meeting local code of ordinance requirements.

553.73 Florida Building Code.

(8)(i) Chickees constructed by the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida or the Seminole Tribe of Florida. As used in this paragraph, the term "chickee" means an open-sided wooden hut that has a thatched roof of palm or palmetto or other traditional materials, and that does not incorporate any electrical, plumbing, or other nonwood features.

State law does not prevent chickees from being constructed by others however those chickees must meet building code requirements.

The state recognized that municipalities have different visions of development for their communities and these visions are implemented through the code of ordinances. Coral Gables has strict development and architectural controls and does not permit chickees. They are not reflective of the community architecture that is being promoted by Coral Gables

Miami Shores like Coral Gables has chosen a mediterranean architectural theme for the community and this goes back to the original development of the communities. Both communities have been active in promoting this type of architecture for new construction, additions and remodeling to reinforce the mediterranean vision for the community. Chickees do not support the original or current vision for Miami Shores. The questions for the Planning Board to consider are whether or not chickees are reflective of the Miami Shores Village community, its architecture and esthetic, and whether or not a chickee would be in harmony with the community.

Chickees present issues for communities in terms of design and materials. By their nature they are high having steeply pitched roofs resulting in construction that can be taller than the main residence. The roof overhang often extends far beyond the supporting posts resulting in a larger than usual eave.

Setbacks are measured from the building wall, in this case the supporting posts, to the property line or other building wall. The zoning code states that eaves shall not extend “more than 36 inches into any side or rear yard” and the extension of the thatch roof from the supporting posts will be treated as an eave for the purpose of calculating this distance.

Thatch roofs and the wooden chickee construction have fire and insect infestation issues including the powder puff beetle that bores into the wood framing and hollows out the logs making them structurally unsound.

Chickees should be treated with a water-based fire retardant that also fights bugs and mildew. Since the fronds are harvested and installed while they’re still green and flexible, the chemical won’t adhere to the waxy surface. Building owners must wait until the roof turns brown, usually in a week or two, before applying the treatment, a task that should be performed annually.

A chickee roof may last 5 or 6 years but could last 10 years or longer, depending on the slope of the roof and density of thatch. They will require rethatching at some time and possibly as soon as 5 years after the initial construction.

In order to regulate chickees, Miami Shores should require the following information as part of a building permit submittal:

1) A Scalable Survey/Site Plan (Acceptable to the Planning Department) showing setbacks from other structures and property lines.

Should the Planning Board consider amendment of the code of ordinances, the following language is provided as an alternative to the language contained within the Village Council Resolution:

The following language contained in Sec 523.1 of the village code is deleted:

Sec. 523.1 Construction.

This section shall not be construed to permit the erection of chickee huts, which are prohibited.

The following language is added to Section 523.1 of the village code.

Section 523.1 Construction.

(j) Chickees are permitted in the residential districts subject to the following conditions:

(1) A chickee shall not be permitted as a principal use on a plot and shall only be permitted as an accessory use to a residence; and

(2) The chickee shall be constructed solely by members of the Miccosukee tribe of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida as evidenced by a copy of the builders Tribal Members Identification Card and shall otherwise satisfy the criteria of Section 553.73(9)(i) of the Florida Statutes; and

(3) A building permit issued by Miami Shores Village is required for a chickee and no building permit shall be issued or construction take place until the status of the builders has been verified and the requirements of the Code of Ordinances have been complied with; and

(4) The following information shall be provided as part of a building permit submittal:
a. A Scalable Survey/Site Plan (Acceptable to the Planning Department) showing setbacks from other structures and property lines; and
b. Floor Plan and Elevations showing all construction materials for proposed construction.

(5) The chickee is located in the rear of the residence and shall be situated so that it is located between the prolongation of the sidelines thereof and further provided that all setbacks for accessory structures are met, except that the rear setback for a chickee shall be 10 feet; and

(6) A chickee shall not exceed 300 square feet in area; and

(7) A chickee shall not exceed 15 feet in height or the height of the residence measured from the ground next to the residence to the roof peak, whichever is less; and

(8) A chickee shall be properly maintained free of insects, vermin and mold, and shall be rethatched as necessary; and

(9) A chickee shall be treated with a water-based fire retardant that also fights bugs and mildew. Building owners must wait until the roof turns brown before applying the treatment. Treatment is to be reapplied yearly; and

(10) The village building official may order that the chickee be rethatched if visual inspection confirms that the roof has deteriorated structurally or aesthetically so as to become structurally unsound or unsightly.

Recommendation

Planning and Zoning staff recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Miami Shores Code of Ordinances and further that the Planning Board make a motion recommending to the Village Council DENIAL of the amendment to Article V, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS; DIVISION 7. QUALITY OF BUILDINGS; Sec. 523.1 Construction, Providing for a Chickee as an Accessory Use in the Residential Districts, Providing for Conflicts, Providing for Severability; and, Providing for an Effective Date. However, if the Board finds that the proposed amendment is harmonious with the community and consistent with the intent of the Code of Ordinances the Planning Board may make a motion recommending to the Village CouncilAPPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the Miami Shores Code of Ordinances. If the Board votes to recommend APPROVAL of the amendment, staff recommends that the amendment include the following language:

Section 523.1 Construction.

(k) Chickees are permitted in the residential districts subject to the following conditions:

(1) A chickee shall not be permitted as a principal use on a plot and shall only be permitted as an accessory use to a residence; and

(2) The chickee shall be constructed solely by members of the Miccosukee tribe of Indians of Florida or members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida as evidenced by a copy of the builders Tribal Members Identification Card and shall otherwise satisfy the criteria of Section 553.73(9)(i) of the Florida Statutes; and

(3) A building permit issued by Miami Shores Village is required for a chickee and no building permit shall be issued or construction take place until the status of the builders has been verified and the requirements of the Code of Ordinances have been complied with; and

(4) The following information as part of a building permit submittal:
a. A Scalable Survey/Site Plan (Acceptable to the Planning Department) showing setbacks from other structures and property lines; and
b. Floor Plan and Elevations showing all construction materials for proposed construction.

(5) The chickee is located in the rear of the residence and shall be situated so that it is between the prolongation of the sidelines thereof and further provided that all setbacks for accessory structures are met; and

(6) A chickee shall not exceed 300 square feet in area; and

(7) A chickee shall not exceed 15 feet in height or the height of the residence measured from the ground next to the residence to the roof peak, whichever is less; and

(8) A chickee shall be properly maintained free of insects, vermin and mold, and shall be rethatched as necessary; and

(9) A chickee shall be treated with a water-based fire retardant that also fights bugs and mildew. Building owners must wait until the roof turns brown before applying the treatment. Treatment is to be reapplied yearly; and

(10) The village building official may order that the chickee be rethatched if visual inspection confirms that the roof has deteriorated structurally or aesthetically so as to become unsightly.

Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.